gbaji wrote:
So you agree with what Steele said? You agree that Bush's strategy of focusing on other more significant nations in the region was right? You agree that it wasn't really as important to muddle around in Afghanistan as it was to take out Iraq and work politically with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to prevent such a thing from happening again?
Lolwut? How on Earth do you come to that conclusion? Aggressive invasion of other peoples countries is what I'm against.
What you should have done imo was treat the aftermath of the 9/11 events as a crime and proceed accordingly. UYou know? Like the civilised country you pertain to be. Full scale invasion of Afghanistan was never going to end well (especially for the Afghanis who DID NOT ATTACK YOU). Invading Iraq was and is a f
Ucking travesty. And Saudi and Pakistan? Yeah, you guys need to work politically with them from a platform of honesty. As in "honestly, if you f
Ucks dont start behaing in a civilised manner then we are going to cease dealing with you as tho' you are our best mates".
gbaji wrote:
Seems like you've been cheering on the wrong side all this time. Also seems as though you should have been bashing Obama a couple years ago when the bulk of his foreign policy position consisted of "We should be fighting in Afghanistan, cause that's the good war we should be trying to win". Strange that I don't recall you saying he was wrong back then. Why do you suppose that is?
I have been bashing
anyone who has thought that war in Afghanistan was a good plan from the start. If you've not been paying attn thats your problem not mine.
gbaji wrote:
Yeah. You're a walking stereotype.
And you read what you want to see, not whats written. whats your point?
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.